Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Brent Bozell :: Townhall.com Columnist
McCain vs. Limbaugh
by Brent Bozell
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


You can tell a lot about how the news media feel about conservatives by watching how they talk about Rush Limbaugh. They want his influence curbed. They pine for the day his career hits the skids. They're constantly looking for a moment where they can declare that conservatives no longer have -- that Rush Limbaugh no longer has -- the Grand Old Party in a menacing trance. They don't want Republican candidates seeking a Limbaugh endorsement.

They think they found that moment on Jan. 19.

When McCain won the South Carolina primary, The Washington Post sharply declared the next day that he had "defused conservative attacks, from Rush Limbaugh to Tom DeLay." CNN's Carol Costello sounded boastful a few days later: "Conservative radio talkers bragged their influence helped put George W. Bush in office. How times have changed. Now leading many Republican polls -- John McCain. And those same talkers aren't bragging anymore. Voters have betrayed them, despite what's playing on Rush Limbaugh's show."

No one chortled more loudly than that expert on conservatism, former NBC anchorman Tom Brokaw. He proclaimed on "Meet the Press" that the voters of America are now rejecting "dogma" and that they are a "nomadic herd" hungering for "solutions" rather than ideology.

Translation? The Reagan ideology is finished (thank God); the conservative movement is gone (good riddance); and happy days are here again, with Republicans embracing Democratic policy prescriptions instead (as they should).

Brokaw doesn't want Republicans to have any troublesome litmus tests to decide which candidate is most conservative, not only because moderates like McCain will fail the test but because it leads Republicans to pitch campaign promises at that conservative base that the media would like to believe is irrelevant.

"I was listening to Rush Limbaugh for an hour yesterday, who is determined to not have this campaign, as he put it, 'redefine' conservatism," proclaimed Brokaw. "And one of the dittoheads, one of his followers, called and said, 'Well, help me out here. What do I think now about Pat Buchanan and Newt Gingrich?' And it's one of the few times I've ever heard Rush Limbaugh kind of temporarily at a loss for words. And he ended up saying that they're not true conservatives. And that debate is not going to help the Republican Party, if they get bogged down in that."

It's funny that Brokaw doesn't think Rush should ever pause before offering a thought. I'm skeptical that Brokaw regularly tunes in to the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies. I'd take his "I've never heard Rush pause" talk with a cave full of salt. I doubt Brokaw has the intestinal fortitude to listen to Rush for a full hour.

But Rush explained the exchange in different words. He paused before listing where Buchanan and Gingrich have not been consistently conservative because it's not easy to call out people who've "been profoundly instrumental in shaping the views of a lot of people in conservatism, and they both, from issue here to issue there, have, in my terms, wandered off the reservation. So I get somebody calling saying, 'Well, what do you think about these guys?' It's tough to have to say these things. I know both these guys, and I like them both."

He wasn't, as Brokaw claimed, saying they weren't true conservatives. He was stating that not every idea they support is conservative. He said Buchanan wasn't really a free-market candidate for president in 1992 and that Gingrich is too willing to get government involved in regulating away "climate change."

Given the intellectual vacuum of the GOP leadership, somebody needs to lead conservatives to analyze the candidate who is truest to their creed. Many talk-radio hosts are taking up that task. So why the hostility toward Rush in particular? Yes, he's the biggest and most influential. But Rush is also uniquely powerful in keeping conservatives from demoralization -- a key objective of the liberal media. Conservatives are understandably glum about their erstwhile champions in Washington, so ingloriously surrendering to liberal pressures. The left would like nothing more than to keep conservatives glum. A McCain nomination would go a long way toward making conservatives want to stay home and stew on Election Day.

Tom Brokaw offering advice to Republicans about how to win elections is like Rush Limbaugh offering advice to the network anchors about how to stop the bleeding of their ever-declining ratings. The recipient of the unsolicited advice no doubt hears it as just noise from someone who doesn't really wish you smashing success.

The only difference is this: Brokaw's advice for the Republican Party is terrible. Limbaugh's advice for the networks -- try a balanced newscast instead of "drive-by" partisan target practice -- would actually be helpful. But they'll never accept it.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Founder and President of the Media Research Center, Brent Bozell runs the largest media watchdog organization in America.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Brent Bozell's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
McCain has no shot
He cant win period. Robert can go off in the sunset with McCain but his days of stabbing us in the back are over. The GOP will stay home and McCain will have to win without us but time and time again, when the real elction rolls around Democrats vote DEMOCRAT and Cain will lose in a landslide.

Hey at least he got the Illegals vote!


Lame As Usual, King Bozell?
Sorry to burst your bubble, but your friend Michael Medved, one of Rush Limbaugh's potoges, has given plenty of evidence proving that John McCain IS one of the strongest conservatives in America. The American Conservative Union's lifetime rating for McCain is 82.5% - 83%. McCain is the only congressman or senator in the last twenty-five years who has never added a single piece of pork legislation onto spending bills (Compare that to Hillary Clinton, whose seven year career in the senate has brought in over 270 earmarks.)
McCain supports overturning Roe Vs. Wade and returning the pro-life issue to the states, which would be a perfect example of federalism. The reason he didn't vote for the Bush tax cuts was because those tax cuts didn't include spending cuts as well, which is only right for economic conservatives to push for.
The only things that really make him look liberal was he had the guts to stand up to people like Jerry Falwell and label them the names they deserve: "Agents of Intolerance." That, or the fact that he has ties to the entertainment industry, which includes cameo appearances on "24" and "Wedding Crashers", and that his daughter was an intern on Saturday Night Live. Other than that, though, he is very much one of the most conservative politicians in America right now, like it or lump. The only difference is that he doesn't go on RINO hunts because he knows the only way the Republican party can win in Washington is to be both the most conservative and the most electable.

Rush Is Being Destructive
Rush is being destructive and childish. It is time for Rush to get some perspective.

For years McCain has constantly visited the troops in Iraq and was right all along about the strategy to be employed there, first in criticizing the prior light footprint strategy as leaving too few boots on the ground and then in vocally supporting thte surge and General Petraeus at a time the Democrats were declaring defeat and most Republicans were either looking for a way out (e.g., Senator Lugar) or looking at their feet (e.g., Romney). How many times has Romney visited the troops in Iraq? ZERO.

The most qualified person to be the next Commander in Chief is McCain. When it comes to military matters, national security and foreign policy, McCain is unequaled, which is why he has all the endorsements he has — among others, John McCain also has the endorsements of former Secretaries of State George Schultz, Henry Kissinger, Lawrence Eagleburger and Alexander Haig, former Navy Secretaries John Lehman and William Ball, General Norman Schwartzkof, and former national security officials Bud MacFarlane, James Woolsey, Tom Kean, Tom Ridge and Robert Inman.

McCain is pro-life and has never run for office (unlike Romney) as a stridently pro-choice, pro-gay rights candidate, that McCain has a 82% approval in his voting record from the ACU and that no one is more of a fiscal hawk on cutting spending than McCain. McCain’s economic proposal stresses making the Bush tax cuts permanent while cutting federal spending, cutting the corporate tax rate and giving R&D credits to enable businesses to prosper and create real jobs.


Phil what about McCains
Global warming stance have you looked into that at all?

All but one of the republican candidates are virtually identical on the war in Iraq.

I've seen the explanation for McCains cross party bills. However it does little to deminish the fact that McCains solution almost always involve increased legislation not less.

Rush is adaptive
Talk radio and the conservatives will have just as big an audience and just as much influence if McCain is elected as if Hillary is elected. There is very little difference between McCain and Hillary on most issues.

McCain is a liberal on almost all issues except Iraq and abortion. Further, the MSM wants the Rep Party to run on "there will be more wars" (John McCain).

To Doug
If the Republicans are NOW in about the same place on the Iraq War, it is because everyone has followed John McCain's strong support of the surge and General Petraeus. That was not the case in early 2007. Romney was soft on the surge, talking about private timetables for withdrawal, and was still in September 2007 talking about the surge only "apparently" working, which McCain had to correct by saying "no, the surge is working." The difference is that McCain has the knowledge and experience to be a LEADER on military matters and foreign policy. As Byron York explains in the National Review yesterday, Mccain is running to be Commander in Chief; and that is the biggest reason why I am supporting him.

John McCain has attempted to outline a position on the environment that avoids the hysterics of Al Gore while dealing responsibly with environmental issues. McCain has worked with the very sane Joe Lieberman on the issue. I don't have a problem with that because I live on Long Island, which is an environmentally sensitive place.

To BG: Get Real
Your apparent and quite unjustified hostility to John McCain is leading you to write insensibly about Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Hillary Clinton is a an anti-military socialist who seeks increased government spending, outright amnesty in immigration, defeat in Iraq, pursuit of appeasement policies in foreign affairs and nomination of left wing judges to the federal bench. McCain will do the opposite.

Hmmmm......
The title of the piece: "McCain versus Limbaugh".

Could also be written: "RINO versus Conservative".

Works for me.

I do not care for Mccain, but...
...if he is the nominee, I will look at who he chooses as his running mate. If his VP choice is a conservative, I mean a true conservative, I may... "may" vote for him. As it stands now, I would have trouble voting for the man, even to prevent the Hildebeast or Obamaslamagamahama from winning.

McCain Feingold
Will a McCain supporter please explain just exactly what is conservative about McCain Feingold? And while you're at it, would you explain the conservatism behind the McCain Kennedy Immigration bill?

McCain=Liar
The primaries aren't over yet, so Mr."Gang of 14" hasn't clinched the nomination. McCain, that darling of "objective" pundits like Chris Matthews,Olberloon,Howard Fineman, etc,etc,can be shown as a liar every day; its when he says this:
"I'm a Conservative."
If you have any self respect, drop out of the race John McCain. You've dropped excrement on your own party every chance you got, all for the sake of TV face-time with your liberal media buddies. Now--guess what--you actually NEED those conservative voters you've smacked around so much....
...so you pretend, you dance, and you lie.
I never thought I'd see anyone lower than the Clintons in politics.

Hello Fairness Doctrine . . .
Goodbye Rush, Goodbye Talk Radio.

With either a President Hilllary, Obama, or McCain; is there any doubt that a Democrat Congress will introduce "Fairness Doctrine" legislation?

Is there any doubt about any of the three signing it into law?

Look for political speech to be limited to the tiny and fractured audiences of Satellite and web cast.

Good Job GOP Voters.

The7Sticks
Sorry, but you're fundamentally wrong on several of your points and it proves why those who support McLame are not conservatives.

1) Why would you compare McAmnesty's record to that of Hellary? Is it because their records are closer than McLib's are to say Mitt's or Rudy's?

2) If McOld is so good on the life issue, then why did he lead the charge to shove McTerrible-Feingold down the throats of the Wisconsin Right to Life?

3) Tax cuts? You are just lying now. In McDem's own words, he did not support the Bush tax cuts because they were "tax cuts for the rich". Hmmm, class warfare, exactly what conservatives have called for.

4) What makes him look liberal is that fact that he puts his name on every junk piece of legislature that the libs propose. McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy (amnesty), McCain-Lieberman (Gore-bull warming bs), Gang of 14...

This is no conservative, not even close...

jetpilot
McLame is the true flip flopper. He was for amnesty before he was against it. He was against the Bush tax cuts before he was for them. He shuts down the WI Right to Life, but he's pro life. He doesn't understand the economy by his own admission to the Boston Globe, but he's an economy hawk all of a sudden. He acts like he rode to Washington in the same car as Reagan, but Reagan would be appalled at his assault on the constitution with McCain-Feingold, McCain-Lieberman, and the Gang of 14.

You're spewing tripe about Mitt "buying the whitehouse" - again, more class warfare garbage. The man's successful and you non-cons are trying to demonize him for it...nice...

Sorry, meant "legislation"...
4) What makes him look liberal is that fact that he puts his name on every junk piece of legislature

Coastal Conservative
Be advised that jetpilot is another handle for Robert.

We try to ignore the troll as he's simply another whiny lib sufering from chronnic BDS.

BTW ALL, swing by my blog for THREE NEW posts! an article on Obambi, Tax and Spend liberals, and coming up shortly, How FDR stacked the deck and screwed the American people. (click on my handle) or bookmark this link:

http://noliberalspin.townhall.com/

You will NOT be disappointed.

McCain Attacked By Rush and Delay?
Are either Rush or Delay conservative? How much pull do Rush and Delay have with the GOP base?

WATCH VIDEO

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/mccain-attacked-by -rush-and-delay


Rush USED to have my respect
Rush's influence (along with Hannity's and Mark Levin's and the rest) DID drop significantly this election.

The reason? It became clear the kind of tactics they were using all along against the Democrats, were "fair play" even for fellow Republicans.

It became clear to those of us who supported one of their "targeted" candidates that they were not on the side of TRUTH but only looking to promote their own version of reality.

The way they repeated soundbite-sized distortions, did not let truth get in their way, and slavishly covered up for their favorite candidates who ALSO happen to have flaws, became extremely transparent to us. We may have bought into it when the target was Democrats but now that those we THOUGHT were on our side were firing at us, the hollowness of their attacks became apparent.

I may not ever believe their attacks anymore, even if the target happens to be a Democrat.

The world is truly not an easy place to live in. You have to actually do all this hard THINKING FOR YOURSELF and RESEARCH. Who has the time for all that? Yet more than ever before, it has become a CRITICAL skill to be a critical thinker.

Question everything, even from people you thought you could trust.

From a Democrat
I am a lifelong Democrat, who if the race comes down to Hill and McCain, he will get my vote, Americans tend not to vote for far left or far right presidents they tend to go with folks who are in the middle and that is a fact. As far as Rush and Brent and rest of the talk radio crowd go, I find it hard to listen to folks who whine about how unfair the media is and then engage in the exact same behavior they cry about that is hypocritical at best

MuhCain wants to take away your rights
1st, 2nd and 4th amendments for starters.

I've been trying to warn people about him for over 10 years - since the day after Columbine when he and Jon Carry (I believe) tripped all over each other to get in front of the camera to propose new gun control laws. Typical DC BS - offer a knee jerk reaction after the fact, which always exacerbates the problem.

I have not and will NOT vote for my lousy Senator from AZ. Wish my good one, Kyl, was running, but no matter.

All of McCain's hyphenated last names, Feingold, Kennedy, Lieberman, make him a total butt boy for the libs. As president (heaven help us) he'd side with the loony left at the expense of the country. The so-called Fairness Doctrine would be reinstated and any new SCOTUS appointment would make Souter or Ginsburg look conservative.

He hasn't represented my politics since he bent over and grabbed his ankles for every dingaling, liberal, touchy feel good, more and bigger gummint control legislation to come out of the dhimmicrats.

And the way he kisses the butt of the MSM is nauseating. I predict there will be a backlash from the talking heads of CNN, NBC etc. trying to shove this jerk down our throats and Rush will still be here, big as ever.

To Coastal Conservative
McCain is no flip flooper; Romney is.

On immigration, McCain accepted the political reality that the majority of Americans are insisting on a law enforcement first approach and that the current problem in immigration bill is the law signed bythen Presidednt Reagan in the 1980's did not have its law enforcement provisions enforced.

In 2001, McCain opposed the Bush tax cuts when he did because spending was not cut and because of the mix of cuts involved. What McCain proposed at the time was a tax cut coupled with spending reductions; we're now in 2008, and at this point not to continue the 2001 tax cuts would result effectively in a tax increase that he opposes. He also insist that spending must be cut.

McCain did not say he did not understand the economy, it is just not his area of expertise like the military and foreign affairs -- subjects where Romney does not have a clue. McCain advisors Phil Gramm and Jack Kemp do know the economy.

The "Gang of 14" enabled judicial conservatives to be appointed ot the U.S. Supreme COurt and the U.S> Court of Appeals. See next post.

"Gang of 14"
There was a Schumer led Democrat filibuster of Bush judicial nominees. While it was said that the fillibuster had not been invoked historically with respect to judicial nominations, that was because judicial nominations were once not political. They are now, because of the Democrats.

There was under consideration the "option" of changing the fillibuster rules so that they could not be invoked as to judicial nominees. The problems with that “option” were: (i) that it was not known whether it would have been passed — many Senators were quietly leery of changing fillibuster rules, which had not been done before; and (ii) if it did pass, if there were a Democrat Congress with the White House in Democrat hands, the road would be open to appoint left wingers to the U.S. Supreme Court and to the U.S. Courts of Appeals. We of course now have a Democrat Congress as a result of the 2006 election and may have a Hillary Clinton Presidency as a result of the 2008 election. Also, had the constitutional option not been passed, it would have meant a blockage of all or almost all of Bush’s judicial nominees.

What the “Gang of 14" refers to was a compromise brokered by a group of Republican and Democrat Senators to allow Bush nominees to be voted on and thus approved unless there be extraordinary circumstances. That way, the Bush nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court and most of the Bush nominees to the U.S. Courts of Appeals could be confirmed without changing fillibuster rules or running the risk of having a complete blockage on conservative confirmations. In fact, John Roberts and Sam Alito were confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court and a great number of Bush nominees to the U.S. Courts of Appeals were confirmed. As a result, Chuckie Schumer is complaining that the Democrats were snookered. Yet, McCain has been pilloried because of the Senate compromise that can fairly be said to have snookered Chuckie. Wrong.

Spot On Phil.
"Hillary is an anti-military socialist who seeks increased government spending, outright amnesty in immigration, defeat in Iraq, pursuit of appeasement polices in foreign affairs and nomination of left wing judges to the federal bench."

Every word right on target.

Hillary, however, does use the Clinton political play book. Rule 1: Appear to be moderate and in the middle politically. This was husband's bread and butter.

Thing is she can't wait to throw Rule No. 1 right out the window. Her real plan is the one you noted: A left to hard left agenda.

THE REAL HILLARY PLAN is not out of the Clinton play book. It comes from the George Soros playbook.


I am beginning to think
that Rush wants clinton to win.
He has become increasingly irrelevant and needs her in office to boost his ratings. What is he to do when McCain is elected? If he continues his attacks on a sitting republican president in wartime, he'll be considered a traitor.

Rush is anything but stupid, he has to see JSM is going to be the nominee, many of the icons of the GOP are backing him and he is the only one to keep the clintons out of the WH.

I suggest he get with the program and put his money where his mouth is, if he truly loves this country as I believe he does, a Mccain presidency is the only way to keep it safe from all enemies foreign as in the jihadists and domestic as in the clintons and their liberal ilk.

Betrayed
Pay day will surely come.

When conservatives stay home on election day, maybe the GOP will get the message that the Republican party will not survive by trying to mimic the liberals.

The end of roberto! :-)
The data does not support anything that roberto says!!!

roberto's days on TH are numbered! They'll be knocking at his door soon! LOL


Shill
Oh, c'mon Frobusto!

"She knows who we are"???

You are nothing but a left-wing hack (with severe BDS) attempting to do precisely what the MSM does - demoralize conservatives.

And to you and all the other posters writing Limbaugh's obituary.

I've been hearing & reading the same "predictions" from your crowd for the last 10-15 years.

Of course, someday you'll be correct. Nobody lives forever.

Acid and wind
Come on. Don't we conservatives eventually get tired of windbags like Rush and acid-tounged harpies like Ann Coulter being our on-air voices of 'reason'? Reality: They provide ENTERTAINMENT, and little else.

phil byler
You are simply delusional.

McCain should be campaigning on his record. Why isn't he?

McCain basically is 80% Hillary, the only difference being that he MAY be a bit more hawkish on foreign policy (but probably not), and he was a POW while Hillary at the same age was a scumbag attorney making sweet insider deals in the futures markets. But as far as their political careers and records go, what's the difference? McCain lies just a little less than Hillary? Whoopdedoo!

NO WAY
The Clintoons will chew Mccain up and spit him out like the OLD MAN IN THE SEA. He want stand a chance against the CLINTONEESTAS.

That is why WOBBIE(THE CRAP DUSTING PILOT) wants MCCAIN for REP Pres.

Isnt it funny that when a LIB like WOBBIE tries to convince REPS that MCCAIN is the best how we are all suppose to say alright WOBBIE but we know
you better than that. Hitlery will have a field day on MCCAIN it wont even be close.

But that is what LIBS are counting on.
Rush will always have his listeners no matter how hard LIBS try to shut him up. Rush has more listeners than MCCAIN will receive votes in the ELECTIONS. ANY BETS

MLDOGGIE POOH
You LIBS will love to see MCCAIN Win because you know that HITLERY will chew him up and SPIT him OUT just like a chaw of tabacco. Are you telling me that KERRY was a WAR ZERO. I think Gore was a draft dodger also.

But unlike you MLDOOGIE at least we(REPS) serve our country not just sit back and try and get our troops to SURRENDER AND RETREAT like you LIBS would love us to do. You are a COWARD and always will be.

You Guys only care for toy soldiers. AT least we care about the SOLDIERS. Not like the WE SUPPORT OUR TROOP LIBS But WANT THEM TO SURRENDER AND RETREAT. The WAR IS LOST remember, Or THE SURGE HAS FAILED and I take it that you support someone who never has served his country.HARRY REID is your HERO ,what a GUY>

Rush Used to be a Conservative
When former social conservative Rush Limbaugh tried to paint Huckabee as a liberal and then do the same with McCain, he lost all credibility as being even remotely objective and capable of conservatism. It seems that Sean, Rush, Drudge, and Hugh and others will lose big on their bets with the Reno oddsmakers and their plan to invest in Romney and push his through has failed. The story is out there and warrants investigation by congress of the influence peddling by the talk show hosts who invested in Romney.

McCain Amnesty
Let us look at McCain’s conservative credentials:
-IMMIGRATION: he wrote the bill granting amnesty to illegal immigrants (co-sponsored by Ted Kennedy)
-SOCIAL SECURITY: he voted to give your social security money to illegal immigrants
-TAXES: he voted against the Bush tax cuts multiple times (he has since flip-flopped and has campaigned as a lifelong tax-cutter)
-RHETORIC: he routinely engages in Democratic class warfare against big companies in America, particularly the “evil” drug companies who research cures to debilitating diseases for a profit
-ECONOMY: as recently as December 2007 he admitted “he does not know the economy very well” and needed to get better at it
-1ST AMENDMENT: he wrote the McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill that was declared to be an unconstitutional infringement of the 1st Amendment (co-sponsored by ultra-liberal Democrat Russ Feingold)
-2ND AMENDMENT: he was called the “worst 2nd amendment candidate” by the president of the NRA
-ENERGY TAX: wrote a bill (co-sponsored by his buddy Lieberman) imposing a massive tax on energy which, according to the Department of Energy, would drastically raise the price of gasoline and put 300,000 Americans out of work
-PRO-LIFE: he filed an amicus brief against pro-life advocates in Wisconsin
-BI-PARTISANSHIP: he met with leading Democrats in 2004 to discuss the possibility of being John Kerry’s Vice-President
-PROFESSIONAL ETHICS: ringleader of the infamous Keating 5 ethical scandal which cost US tax payers $160 billion (Google it)
-PERSONAL ETHICS: McCain cheated on his first wife after she had a severe accident that left her partially disabled. He then divorced her and married his multi-millionaire mistress, whose daddy bought McCain a spot in the Congress

Rush 's doublestandards.
I oppose the "Fairness doctrine".

Let Limbaugh rant. There is even now a pervasive liberal bias among most media. It was so blatant that it was one of the reasons for the emergence of "talk radio".

But...Limbaugh is a hypocrit. He turns a blind eye toward Bush when the president violates conservative principle, yet excoriates McCain for the same sin.

He is an unapologetic zealot for Bush's Iraq venture. Limbaugh reserves most of his invective on McCain, even tho McCain's position on Iraq is about the same as Bush's; McCain's position on the border is about the same as Bush's; McCain's position on Law of the Sea treaty is the same as Bush's; and McCain's view of No Child Left Behind is the same as Bush's.

But Limbaugh gives Bush a pass, heaps adulation on Bush, yet excoriates McCain...yet McCain is far truer to conservative principles on opposing government spending, and opposing pork-laden legislation, than Bush.

It is Limbaugh who is guilty of violating true conservatism by his sycophantic and drooling support of Bush on this ill-fated, neocon, neo-Wilsonian, leftist-inspired interventionist scheme to remake the middle-east, and by his apparent inability condemn Bush for the very same infractions that Limbaugh, in a spittle-induced rage, reserves for John McCain.

Get of the Rush bashing....
My goodness, the pills were for pain, highly addictive - happens alot - move on. Mr. Byler, thank you for the education. You are totally correct in your assessments - let the games continue!

King Liberal
We got it the first time...

I don't over- or under-estimate the influence of conservative talk radio.

The reason why the amnesty vote was derailed is because both Republicans and Democrats were (for once) in agreement for tougher border security.

The in-fighting over Republican candidates is totally different and appeals to a smaller segment of society.

As to Rush and McCain - longtime listeners know Rush hasn't been a McCain supporter for years. This is nothing new.

Rush lost me
for selling us on Bush back in 2000. Rush assured us that GW was a solid conservative (fiscally and socially) based on their private conversations.

His personal admiration for Bush, along with his desire to make the Left the SOLE culprit for all wrongdoing, stood in the way of objectively analyzing the damage being done.

Rush loves to say "I told you so" but he's never owned up to this miscalculation.

Rush doublecrossed Conservatives in 2000
It was Mr. Limp-paw that sold us GWB as a Conservative in 2000. Never forget that. GWB brings up certain Conservative issues as a flag, but as an executive he has been an impossible incompetent, as a Conservative political leader, until this last year he has been a zero veto guy.

Thank you Rush, for that.

Now if you guys are so anti-McCain, ask Rush to start a new organization -- Conservatives for Hillary. As sure as God made green apples, sitting on your derrieres and moaning on election day, is a vote for Clinton.

McCain/Hillary Race
What if McCain faces Hillary this fall? Both candidates would limp to the finish line, as conservatives cannot stand McCain, and Hillary has alienated most blacks.

McCain is betting on conservative's fear of a Hillary Presidency that will overcome thier distate for him. However, Hillary would probably have a difficult time rallying blacks to the booth. If Blacks stay home -even a 5% lower turn out- and she can kiss the White House goodbye. Turn-out overall will be low, and McCain would win.

If Obama even comes close in delegate counts, then the pressure will be huge for Hillary to concede to her rival. Obama could spark a huge turn out of African American voters, which could turn the election in his favor. In that case, without Hillary on the ticket, McCain's goose is cooked.

King LIB
Ill take that bet because you could never leave this board because you love to instigate to much SH#T on here.

Tell you what I will let you give me my new call sign and I will get to give you a new call sign for 1 year.
Becuase if I won how would I actually know if you where not on here if you change your call sign. Thats like saying The cup is half full instead of half empty. But that is how you LIBS run things anyway.

Also for your info Troops have been coming back.
But want be long before your LIB DRIVE BY MEDIA
starts to broadcast that info to the TERRORIST so they can wait us out again.
Terrorism=LIBISM

War is a failure. Hum I guess thats why your Best Buds, Harry REID,Murtha,Even NANCY P stated that it seems to be working? I bet that gets your GORD that they are now agreeing with BUSH.
Bush will do whatever GEN P needs him to do and I know you LIBS hate that. REMEMBER RETREAT and SURRENDER is in the LIBS BLOOD.

Wobbie
You ought to be thanking RUSH and his followers or we would have had the ILLEGAL AMNESTY BILL up yours. If it wasnt for the Radio listeners this Bill would have passed and you know its true.
Im not a radiohead myself but they sure stopped the ILLEGAL AMNESTY BILL in its tracks. Thank God for talk RADIO or that Bill would have been signed and sealed by now. Now when HITLERY beats MCSHAME like a step child in the Elections you will see and ILLEGAL AMNESTY BILL.


There seems to be
a couple of posters here who are battling serious sexual feelings toward Limbaugh, indeed both Limbaughs, by constantly professing over-the-top hatred for him. Give it up, guys. Open the closet door.

Frobusto, aka "Fraud" Robert writes:
"Fat boy and pill popper rush...just like the far right no self control!"

This from the poster who was just last week excoriating others for name-calling - calling them "juvenile".

This from the poster who claims to be an active duty Naval officer who regularly and systematically dishonors the uniform by his attacks on his Commander-in-Chief.

The real coward is the one who hides behind his anonymity while actively fracturing the UCMJ.

"Robert" - the ultimate hypocrite.

Primus54
BAM! Great post on Frobusto. haha. The idiot is on Jeffrey's thread trying to educate justpaul! D*mn that boy is THICK as a brick.

Remember this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_five

Our Problem as Conservatives
We have no candidate. We have a trashed Constitution. We have a deep in the gut sick feeling because we now believe Hillary may be the next President. If so, we can expect, higher taxes, more Socialism, deep recession, appointment of more Liberal Judges,less military and political pressure on countries promoting and supporting terrorism, Iran to go nuclear, and a woman to try and face down Radical Islam when we know she will receive no respect from them. We are in a mess and we made it.

No bags, bubbleheads.
I don't need Limbaugh or anyone to tell me about John McCain, we don't have bags over our heads out here, like the liberal media would like to believe. They're the ones who live in a bubble and McCain only took SC and FL, because of elderly and military retirees, but they don't influence votes that heavily in other states. McCain didn't do well anywhere else, except NH, where Dems crossed over and voted for him.

We don't even know if the absentee ballots have been counted in FL. I can't find that info anywhere, and they said it made up 1/3 of the vote and Romney was ahead in those.

McCain, labels, ratings, etc.
Makes little difference what the ACU's "ratings" of McCain are, or what Medved says about McCain being a real "conservative". McCain-Feingold, Amnesty, his use of vulgar language toward conservatives, etc., would be enough to keep me from voting for him. Sorry, no McCain for me, and I will not vote for him just because he labels himself a "Republican."

Limbaugh
Totally irrelevant anymore, except for his lap dog wimp at Red State, nobody cares what he says. I have facts to prove it, last big fights:
UAE Port Deal, Limbaugh loses
Michael J . Fox, Limbuagh not only loses but is the reason the R lost the senate seat narrowly.
Huckabee in Iowa, Limbaugh loses
Now McCain will be the nominee.
Very Simple, the man whose only claim to fame before becoming the voice of conservative radio was spinning Dell Shannon records at the Groovy Qvee at an am radio station in Pittsburgh has lost any influence. SAvage up, Limbaugh down.

Rush is right - as in "right-wing"
He's not a Republican, he's a conservative. Most of us who listen to him identify ourselves in the same way.

I don't listen to partisan apologists, left or right. The only ones I can stomach are Rush, Ingraham, Hannity (occasionally) and I regularly download Prager's podcasts off this site.

My point is, I'm an independent thinker and I appreciate listening to people who are transparent about their biases. They only exist on the right. Leftists try to fool us into thinking they're objective. They are the fools.

sorry.........
wobbie..the only way juan mexico is going to make it to the whitehouse is when he comes to visit either hillary or obama as their vice president!
this race isnt over..and for the blogger who said
juan won among gop only....har har..fla. is no longer dominated by conservative republicans....
that is fact! the cubans dont like any candidate
that talks strong against illegal immigration...mitt..............................
mr. mel martinez can tell you that! and 0ver 50% of the voters said they voted for juan because the gov. another open borders guy...endorsed juan! if arnie told me who to vote for someone here(endorsement) in calif. i would not listen to that jerk! i think for my self! duh!elvis

KING LIB
I think the people know what BUSH stated at the Beginning of this War and I quote. This is going to be a long War and will need the backing of the American people. I dont hear that much about the WAR yet during these debates but garantee you they will be back on the table as soon as its down to 1 REP and 1 DEM for Pres.

Hitlery will not, I repeat will not pull out of IRAQ for she will not be labeled as the President who Lost the WAR in IRAQ to AL-QEADA Terrorist. The REPS best partner is Mccain in the IRAQ WAr but Hillery cant wait to be called the President who defeated TERRORISM in IRAQ I can see her HEAD now.
Hillery will destroy MCCAIN in the elections.

Juan McCain!
McCain could stand on his head, and promise the world....and I still won't vote for him.

His gang of 14, smooching up to Teddy and illegals......he claims he didn't know anything about Juan Hernandez's reputation for saying "everything for Mexico"......bull, he knows what Juan is about.

KL
The Pres did a LIB thing and you bash him for that also. I thought LIBS were for the unforunate ones of this country. WOW sounds to me that some of the talk on here is rubbing off on you. LIBS hate giving things away to people in need, whom thats a new one on us REPS.,

GO HUCKABEE!!!
.

Truthful James and Robert
Yes, I think it was Limbaugh who convinced his flock that G.W. Bush was a genuine conservative in 2000.

No wonder he cannot now say he made a tragic blunder. His reputation is on the line.

Look what happened under the administration of G.W. Bush: Radical and out of control government spending; a neo-Wilsonian, interventionist, half-baked socio-political experiment to see if democracy and Islam are compatible; attempts at amnesty; promotion of "No Child Left Behind"; support for "Law of Sea Treaty"; and, in my modest opinion, Bush was behind-the-scenes force in getting his personal buddy from Texas, Johnny Sutton, to vigorously prosecute the two border patrol agents.

Add to the above noxious brew are Limbaugh sycophants heaping scorn upon a genuine war hero, while taking delight in defending the draft-dodging Cheney, and in the Bush family's influence in protecting G.W. Bush from seeing any combat in Vietnam.

Methinks genuine conservatives should be aghast.

But then, genuine conservatives don't see the world thru the prism of Rush Limbaugh.

Independent on the Right
The GOP is not moving on, it is splintering. a McCain ticket (one that may even add Lieberman) is not a traditional Republican ticket. They would be runnning on a historically independent ticket.
Meanwhile, the Clintons are splintering the Democratic party and Hilary will probably be the nomination. This will push more votes towards the independent ticket of McCain/Lieberman.
Conservatives on both sides of the isle may be open to a new form of independent ticket.
A new ticket led by a republican that led a Democratic state, where Romney could be himself, may be appealing.
I would like to see him try, beacuse I cannot vote for a career politician that is just as condescending and arrogant when people disagree with his positions as Teddy Kennedy, Hilary Clinton, Harry Reid...
McCain is an elitist career politician that pawns himself off as the common man. It is the worst of all political deceptions.
Wake-up to his lies, he is running just as disgusting of a campaign as Hilary and Bill.

left - right march to globalism ...
it's an obvious playbook that seems to be in effect since we started the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton marching orders. if you analyze it that way; Rush in marginalizing Buchanan and Paul has also betrayed the Conservative movement. the only economic nationalists and non-Israel firsters in foreign affairs are Buchanan and Paul and the MSM, including "right wing" supposedly independent talk radio completely ignores them.

what you have in McCain attacking Romney from the "right" on the Iraq war is the following: we've already established that none of the Republican's give a rat's behind about illegal immigration, reining in government waste and entitlements, or exporting our industry overseas, so CEOs can reap the profits, or for that matter, the finagling Federal Reserve and the Bernanke/Greenspan manipulation of the day, and our onerous tax code; the only "right wing" agenda we'll permit on the "right wing" battlefield of "ideas" is just how hawkish the Republicans stake in the ground will be as far as Israel's wars goes. the Conservative movement today is all about the neo-Cons and their MSM gatekeepers (who also pay Rush's and O'Reilly's salaries).

Rush is to be lauded for pointing out that McCain sabotaged illegal immigration legislation when Republicans presumably had the votes but also notice that Rush never subjected Jorge Bush to the withering attacks that he reserves for "left-wing" liberals. IOW, left-right is just a big distraction that keeps people's eyes off the fact that both parties appear to be in cahoots with their MSM big money "controllers."

No you're not
Robert writes: Wednesday, January, 30, 2008 10:18 AM
I am sorry

Say President McCain a few times...

LOL

Robert
-----------------
Geez Robert, from your orgasms one would think that you expect to be promoted to rear-2 so you can create more carbon output with your (self-appointed) righteousness. Next thing I expect from you is Jesus point papers claiming McCain really isn't suffering from dementia.

BTW, nice couple million negative phone calls against Romney by your boy. I guess the moral high ground isn't something he uses consistently. Hope he enjoys being broke heading into states that require a real advertising budget.

rush limbaugh, et al
I shall predict that regardless of whether the next US Pres is a Liberal Dem or a RINO McCain, that "fairness doctrine" will be revisited to silence conservative talk radio.
If conservatives had any true grit, they would organize enough to bolt the GOP for a national political party of their own (even if it means allowing Dems the upper hand for eight years).

WOBBIE
We must be getting to you becuase you are always stating 4000 deaths and trillions of dollars on Iraq.

By the way who do you think we are fighting in IRAQ, TERRORIST the WAR with SADAAM has been over for awhile where have you been.

Oh I know UP MCSHAMES ARSE.

HALD Pick me up in your DUMBO RIDE at DISNEY
the Peeps on here are picking on me again.

Charlie
I'm in.

Warrior is Right
you need to add 30 million illegals to your list. WHen McCain put his amnesty bill out there, the number of illegals in my neighborhood skyrocketed, palpably and noticeably, and i'm in Oregon. Once McCain has pi*mped our sovereignty, we will never get it back through the political process.

BTW, Like Rush, I'm a conservative, not a Republican. R is clearly now on its way to being just a "party" . . . . better drink up as I hear last call coming.

phileo
You hit the nail on the head.Let the cry babies cry.

mcCain vs Brokaw
If you so called conservatives continue in the route of crazed ideology, the GOP will be extinct in less than 20 yrs.you will lose the white House, congress, states govs etc. check the exit polls and see how McCain defeated hardline Romney among conservatives in Florida. Characters like Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, and Ingraham are trapped in the xenophobic cocoon of conservatism.They are not an intellectuals. they feast on the myopia of some gullible Americans. do you have to be a democrat of repubican to know that we should act now about global warming. even Bush agrees. Is not silly to brand hispanics and and expect them to vote for the GOP. I am conservative , but we need to think beyond narrow precepts...churchill spencer

GunnyG-BrianR-USMC-TheUsualSuspects
The Fat RINO, Dork Morris, endorses Juan McAmnesty.

The Geek RINO, Michael Midroad, endorses Juan McAmnesty.

THE ILLEGALS endorse Juan McAmnesty.

King Liberal endorses Juan McAmnesty.

Wobbie endorses Juan McAmnesty.

Name a State with a more POROUS border than Arizona.

McAmnesty-Feingold, McAmnesty-Kennedy, McAmnesty-Liberalman, Gang of 14, etc.

JUAN MCAMNESTY IS A LIBERAL!

Wobbie: Hal, I have to make a poopie.

Hal Doofus: Weigh yourself first. If you fall in, I need to know how much to dip out.

Don't Underestimate Rush
Despite what people say, Rush never fancied himself a Kingmaker. If truth be known, he has been on the losing end of many policy fights in his 20 year career. The reason being, conservative views overall are still very unpopular with rank and file Americans. Most Americans don't mind big goverment as long as they see the Feds as thier friend and get something out of it. Most Americans are Center or Center-Right.

Rush's biggest problem with McCain is his insistence on fighting conservatives. McCain-Feingold, tax cuts, global warming are just a few. Rush has also threw critiques at Mitt. Mitt may have discovered the light, but he governed as a liberal. As far as I know, Rush hasn't endorsed anyone, and will probably not endorse any GOP candidate this cycle.

As for McCain winning despite Rush's disapproval, big deal. Again, conservative are not the majority; however, thier votes are critical for a GOP candidate winning the White House.

Rush still commands a 20 million listener's market. His value is his personality, and his ability to entertain for 3 hours day-in and day out. His listeners think and vote how they please -I know I will. And I still tune into to Rush for a few minutes every week.

If the Democrats win the White House it will be because of low conservative turn-out. Rush will probably beg conservatives to vote, but I know of many that will refuse to cast a vote for a liberal or moderate. Rush Limbaugh is no all powerfull precinct captian. To make him out as one is foolish. It is a strawman's arguement to say that a victory for McCain is a lose for Rush. In the end, McCain will probably regret makeing so many conservatives his politcal enemy.

Rush is irrelevant
This guys has no dept. Just like Malkin, Hannity, Ingraham, and Coulter. all they preach is hate. no substance at all. with the way things are going, its evident Americans are starting to decipher the silly messages of Rush and his co-travellers. its in the interest of real GOP members to ignore them. i have listened to these talk show hosts and found out they have nothing to offer...but hate. they continue to demonise those who favour minorities...it is classic Goebell of Nazi Germany. For Limbaugh and co, ICE should act like the gestapo in Poland...move from house to house and get these guys...just like the Nazis saw jews as nuisance, so Rush and co see minorities...

Phil Byler
You write: “McCain is no flip flopper; Romney is.”

“On immigration, McCain accepted the political reality that the majority of Americans are insisting on a law enforcement first approach and that the current problem in immigration bill is the law signed by then President Reagan in the 1980's did not have its law enforcement provisions enforced.”

So Phil when McLame changed his mind about a position he is not a flip flopper but when Romney did – he is? Nice double standard. Of course it doesn’t bother you that McLame said he’d build the “g*ddamned fence”, clearly indicating the disdain he had for the voices of the American people? After all he knows better than us right Phil?

You wrote: “McCain did not say he did not understand the economy, it is just not his area of expertise like the military and foreign affairs -- subjects where Romney does not have a clue. McCain advisors Phil Gramm and Jack Kemp do know the economy.”

Of course more double standard BS Phil. It’s OK to be comfortable that McLame will surround himself with economic experts as advisors on a subject he is not expert at, but the fact that Romney would be surrounded by expert military advisors (i.e. The Joints Chiefs) to advise him on all matters military is irrelevant to you.

And then of course there is McCain-Feingold, the biggest attack on the Free speech Rights of We the People to ever come down the pike, which you conveniently leave out of your dissertation.

I will vote for McLame over Hitlery but I will have to do so holding my nose because we need anyone but her. I don’t think Romney is the perfect candidate either however I think it is time We the People simply start voting incumbents out of office for the next decade regardless of party, position, or tenure, until they understand that this is a government “by the people and for the people” and begin acting that way.




n.a.
Sheesh!

Get away from the Kool-Aid and adjust the tin-foil hat!

What a moonbat...

Rush being Rush...
Rush is speaking for conservatives and the 20million of us who listen in, are in agreement with most that he has to say. To back down on his attacks on McCain would be to compromise the ideology he believes in not to mention alienate his audience. I think that Rush is feeling what many of us are. That is, some would rather see a liberal democrat screw up the country for four years rather than a liberal republican. Either that, or he's playing to his audience.

It sounds like some liberals think that Rush is a campaign manager. He's an entertainer and he acknowledges that himself. If McCain gets elected, Rush will have four more years of good material to work with and will continue to make millions doing what he does.

Frobusto, aka "Fraud" Robert writes:
"President John McCain. Doesnt (sic) it sound great (have another Pill Rush!...)"

How do you look yourself in the mirror, Robert?

No honor - no guts - and no glory.

JPK
Right on

I'm Free At Last!
If McCain wins the nomination with his string of 35% victories I'll be so impressed that I'll want to be just like him... and go vote with the Democrats. If the Republican establishment, the same cleptomaniacs that destroyed our majority in Congress and betrayed every principle of conservatism, thinks that this snarky old dotard has a ghost of a chance then they deserve a fifty-state shellacking.

Brokaw on talk radio
Talk about being tormented.
Picture this:

It's pouring. It's cold. Traffic jam for over on hour. Moved 2 miles. Listening to Brokaw being interviewed by Bob Costas about his book on the 60's. They were so gleeful. They said absolutely nothing. I waited and waited. They went on and on and they said absolutely nothing.

Wobbie
Even though I vowed to never respond to your drivel I must ask: Do you ever have anything relatively intelligent to say about any subject at all? You prove time and time again that you have nothing to add to the debate but spew. It is apparent in post after post that you know nothing about history at all and today you have proven that. It is also clear that you don't listen to Rush regularly or you would never say the ignorant and stupid things you do. And don’t call me a Rushbot or any of that cr@p. I and a lot of his listeners disagree with some of his positions (especially on GWB). We are not mindless automatons as you've been taught by Dim leaders you meathead. Take a look in the mirror for that. You spew Dim talking points day after day when you’re not just flat out making stuff up. It would be amazing if you could ever provide a link or a reference to back up the nonsense you spew.

Worst of all: libdolts like you, who demand mercy and compassion for all drug addicts, gays, murderers, perverts, and rapists from the rest of us - always resort immediately to ad hominen attacks on conservatives as being closet gays, perverts, and pill poppers, etc. I wonder why the gay lobby never beotches about that. You disgust me and I wish you'd go back to Huff n Puff where you belong. You are pathetic.

P.S. - I've asked you before to learn the difference between "to" and "too" but you refuse to do so. It is inconceivable that a military officer (which you fraudulently claim to be) would not know the difference.

n.a.
Either you lack any intellectual honesty or you simply lack intellect. First, look at the exit polling, Romney significantly out performed amongst those Republicans that consider themselves conservative. In a typical Democrat manner, I guess you believe that if you say it, it makes it so.
Second make a rational argument instead of degrading the discourse with references to the gestapo and Nazi Germany. Typically when a Democrat can not intelligently argue the issues they throw around such disgusting comparisons that not only degrade the discussion, but diminish the acutal tragedies that have occured and befallen such people.
If somebody needs to be picked up of the ground and I feel I should help, that is my choice. If I think they should pick themselves up, that is my choice as well. It is called free will. I guess because I don't want the government to tell me I have to pick you up I am one of those bad people you seem to hate.
If you really believe it is societies obligation to help others (and I do) go out and make a difference, donate your time and money, but don't force it on everyone through government programs. That is counter to the freedoms upon which our government was founded. Not only that, but our government is so inept we would all be throwing money away or into the pockets of special interests instead of helping our fellow citizens. Go out and make a differnce, but don't tell me I have to by government dicta (talk about gestapo like).

LIBS
For LIbs to know so much about Rush is amazing to me since most on here say they dont listen to him. I believe their true colors is coming out.

Rush is a entertainer in my book and thats all, for all on here to get their panties in a twist over a entertainer is mind baffling.

Phil Byler - Gang of 14
My problem with the gang of 14 is that it is unconstitutional. The confirmation of judges calls for an up and down vote. I am aware that the Senate makes it's own rules, but should those rules be allowed to subvert the constitution? And why is McLib "comprimising" on matters of the constitution? This is a theme with him that is why. Maybe we should send him a copy with little tabs for his reference. McLame has to go.

People (I use the term loosely) like
Georgewackotwin and his cohorts always save the Republican Party from defeat. Count on it again this year. And sooner or later MoveOntraitors.org will screw up again. Why? Because they can't help themselves. Just like Georgewackotwin.

And once again, Hillary will have to field questions concerning the AlQuaeda loving, America hating traitors like the MoveOn people (I use the term loosely). These are the left wing fools who just love Hil and Obama.

The American people need to know who supports of "Mr. Empty Suit" and "She Who Cackles". Good idea for the Republican Party to make sure they do know!


Good Riddance, Rush
Maybe I am writing his career obit too soon,
but I think that Rush Limbaugh is one of the
worst things to happen on the political scene.

I could write reams about why this is so, but
everyone already knows. And worse, he has
spawned so many other wannabes.

He has spent his fat and florid life belittling
people of worth because they happen to disagree
with his political "vision" which I think lies
largely on self-promotion and getting rich.
The nastier he became, the more popular he became.

Which came first, the chicken (Rush) or the
egg(nasty people). Did Rush get rich because
people are nasty or did people get nasty
because Rush hit the radio scene. Perhaps, they
just feed on each other.

McCain is not my first choice
But if he wins the GOP nomination, I'll vote for him.

I agree he's not the best conservative on the issues, and he's pi**ed off a lot of people, but compared to Hillary? I mean, come on.

I'm still planning to vote for Mitt in the primary (I preferred Duncan Hunter, then Fred Thompson), but if McCain wins, we need to remember that he still agrees more with us on most issues than Hillary does. He has a consistent pro-life voting record, supported the surge and is strong on the war on terror, and he is fiscally conservative most of the time (according to his record in the Senate). He is also pro-2nd amendment.

He is wrong re. immigration, McCain-Feingold and a couple of other items. However, Hillary is wrong on 95% of the issues. Are we really going to allow a Socialist into the White House because we disagree with McCain on some of the issues?

viruddh "opines":

... and when he does, there is a collective thought.

Who cares?

viruddh
Sorry, I didn't realize I wasn't suppose to express my views here.
Voters don't decide to raise taxes, politicians do. Put any of the propoesd tax increases of the Democrats to a national referendum and I would bet they wouldn't pass.
That may be how you see our country and that is fine with me, debate the issue. My problem is that certain folks feel and state on this blog that the position it is better to teach people how to pick themselves up instead of just doing it for them, makes you evil or racists. That lacks any intellectual honesty or true discourse of the issues.
If I feel a government where we have billions in medicare and medicaid fraud in NY state alone, cannot be entrusted with any more tax dollars and that special interests, corporations and hidden pork are ripping money out of my hands and not supporting those that truely need it.
i beleive in small gov, you in big. Debate the merits instead or running off at the mouth about how with morally bankrupt platitudes.

Rush et al
I just listened to Glenn Beck, another Rush clone blowhard. He's horrified at the prospect of a McCain nomination. I say "Go Glenn. Go Rush"
As a card carrying liberal, I delightin such ranting, as it helps assure a return to a rational presidency, probably in the form of a Clinton/Obama ticket.

What none of these bozos realize is that a big factor in the demise of the Republican party in 2006 was their over the top, ridiculous rhetoric. Republicans and independents finally realized these guys were nothing but angry, self serving, hate filled buffoons. They lost their cache and simply couldn't motivate folks any longer.

The only people who still take their cues from the right wing talk radio megaphone are the farthest right leaning people in America. Everyone else has been alienated. And here they are, effectviely telling people on the far right not to bother voting.

Go limbaugh, Go limbaugh, Go Limbaugh

n.a.
What is it with you libdolts that makes you characterize every statement by a conservative that you don't agree with as "hate". WE DON'T HATE YOU - WE JUST THINK YOU ARE TERRIBLY MISGUIDED AND YOUR JUDGEMENT STINKS!!! THAT IS NOT HATE - THAT IS A FACT!!!!

n.a. Part 2
Also just like a libdrool you would like the police to go house to house and remove anyone who disagrees with your pathetic positions. If you can't beat 'em - violate their free speech rights and lock them up. Pathetic.

n.a. Part 3
Ooops. reread your post and that is not at all what you said. My bad.

Primus54
I see all The Liberal Cowards are here name calling while hiding behind their keyboards again.

Jack
Your last entry is a perfect case-in-point proving my criticism. Your last set of comments lacks one iota of substance. This is all so pathetically tiring, I'm out.

Georgeloon
What, we should reach through the screen somehow? Its an internet site, doofus, Being behind a keyboard is part of the deal.

Gotta give props to Virrudh's piece though. Too subtle for the average TH'er though. What Limbaugh did was to make it perfectly OK, even admirable, to use the lowest and meanest school yard tactics to politically undermine his opponents. He was a typical middle school bully type who made his fortune demeaning and humiliating people.

People just grew up.
PS. For those of you who defend LImbaugh and his ilk by claiming he is just an entertainer, I have to ask why he, as an entertainer,doesn't get the same critcism from you that entertainers from Hollywood get, i.e that they should just shut up and entertain.




Bill
Actually, what I wrote is very perceptive. It might be interesting for you to post an actual response.

Jerk
You prove my point!

Rush does NOT think for us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We can think critically quite well on our own thank you. The reason conservative gravitate to Rush, Sean, Bob Grant, Dennis Prager and Larry Elders is that they provide a SANCTUARY from the Lame Stream Dinosaur media. If you miss ABC, CBS or NBC just watch MSNBC, CNN or Doomsberg TV. They all think alike and have pack mentality. 98% of journalists are registered as either Democrat or Independent. No more than 1% are Republican or Conservative.

It is NO ACCIDENT that they are drooling over McAmnesty as the GOP candidate. They know he'll drive away conservatives in droves. Even a bozo like Obamamama can beat McAmnesty with their nonstop cheerleading. Look at the media resucitation effort in 1992 after Perot bugged out for a while. It work and THEY elected Billy Jeff and Hitlery.

The dominant media culture (who live in a vast echo chamber) have ignored any candidate who is for meaningful border control and strong defense. If Romney winds up with 3x as many delegates after Super Tuesday as McAmnesty they will STILL be talking that anti-Constitutional dirtbag up.

McAmnesty has made a career out of stabbing Conservatives and the GOP in the back for the fawning acclaim of the media which his aide admitted are his REAL constituency.

NONE of the GOP guys is wart-free, but for now a Romney/Thompson ticket is one I could force myself to pull the lever for.

-Ray

Georgetwin
Liberals are never happy unless they have something to complain about. Lilly is a perfect example..If they didn't have anything to complain about there lifes would be void and without substance.

wrat wrangeler writes
"We can think critically quite well on our own thank you"

Exactly..And thats the sort of thing that drives the liberals bonkers...Great Post


There isn't a viable candidate
In the lot of them. That is what the real crying shame of this nation is.

Rush Conservatism Won
King Liberal"Florida was a closed primary and the conservatives he (Rush) was counting on to turn their backs on McCain did the opposites"

No, your math is wrong. You are right it was a closed primary...which means that only Republicans voted.McCain did not win 36%...he lost 64% of the Republican vote. That is a sure sign that conservatives do agree with Rush...64% of the time..not a bad statement at all.

Of course, what the conservatives choose to do with this information remains to be seen. but it sure speaks badly about McCain's chances on winning in November.

Jack
What the hell are you talking about? Low, school yard tactics? I suppose telling the truth is low and school yard. Usually is to those that value deceit and tyranny, such as McCain and the rest of the Democrats.

Phil Byler
I noticed you are defending McCain's conservatism in many posts, but somehow seemed to skip the questions I posed on my 1:53AM post. So, I'll ask them again: Exactly what is conservative about McCain Feingold and McCain Kennedy? I'll even throw in another one: McCain Lieberman.

Please, I'd like to know how any of these reflect conservatism. What I, and many others, are afraid of is this is the type of legislation we'll be getting from John McCain. This is his most recent track record. This is what he is thinking right now. Since you are so well versed in how conservative McCain really is, please tell us how these bills support conservatism.

Jack
Just when I think I am out, you pull me back in.
Nobody takes their cues from the right wing talk show hosts. If people do they need to grow up and reach out for a little more info.
But calling them buffoons does nothing. If you have a particular issue they raise to discuss, like big gov vs small gov, personal responsibility vs government responsibility, large taxes vs lower taxes, then do it.
These are entertainers and nothing more, but the blanket reduction of some of their legitimate arguments with calls of buffoonery or even worse racism provides nothing.
Your comments are useless and I really am wasting too much time here.
bye, bye

It's the Middle, Stupid
Whomever wins, Republican or Democrat, it will be whomever can garner the most middle/independent votes. either by positive attraction to one side, or aversion to the other. The FACT is there are not enough Limbaugh purist conservatives to do that. Likewise, there may not be enough Clinton liberals either. So which candidate, and the accompanying entertainer shill, is the most likely to not force the middle to the other camp?

A hero?
Am I sukpposed to be impressed because McCain who graduated 5th from the bottom of his class cuz he was too busy partying (or maybe just too dumb)but Daddy and Granpa were influential Admirals so he graduated. Crashes five planes when I understand (pilots help me) you lose two and you wash out. Then spends time in a POW camp, with others who could fit the honorific
much better than he given his current history.
Benedict Arnold was a hero, brillian General and I don't believe he crashed 5 horses before he went to battle but we don't call him a hero now.
What hero spikes a report with useful idiot and traitor Kerry about the MIA/POW's? Refuses to
co sponsor a bill by the Legion/VFW on Agent Orange til dragged kicking and screaming after 200 other signatures? I haven't heard of any other POW heros turning on his fellows like this
modern Benedict Arnold. He doesn't deserve any
title other than Benedict Arnolds sycophant.

And
McC took an oath that every American veteran takes, plus every elected official to protect and defend. McShamnesty anyone? If you believe he didn't know Juan (Creepy Smilin' Jack) isn't on his staff as immigration advisor when Michelle had the photo proving it, needs to go bridge shopping. He's paying lip service to REagan conservatives but I at least will go down with guns a blazin', no quarter and it won't be on my head what happens to this country. Theirs not a rats patoot difference between him and his
DemonRat buddies. Some hero, I won't lower my standards to vote for him. And I have a feeling
maybe Huck brokered a deal to bring the evangelicals along for the ride well this is one
sheep whose smart enough not to take the bait.

No Bill, You can't Leave
Your comments are a good dexample of what I am saying. You want a discussion of X vs Y, A vs. B, C vs D. You are, perhaps unwittingly, exhibiting the talk radio mind set, where things can only be discussed in Manichean, right versus wrong, terms.

For example, you want to characterize the choices as big versus small government, as if those things really mean anything. I want a government is the right size to do what it needs to do.

How about personal versus government responsibility. There is no such choice in reality. Conservatives are no more interested in personal responsibility than anyone else. Large taxes versus lower taxes? How about appropriate levels of taxation based on what people want the government to do. (Want to fight a war, then raise the taxes to do it.)

The whole process of reducing issues to simplistic black and white choices, eliminating the need for any real understanding of detail or nuance, is a shining example of the effect of talk radio.

Georgetwinkle
I prove your point? Impossible. You haven't had a point in years.

Jack on talk radio
Actually Jack...Talk radio gives us the details and nuance to keep us out of the gray that the MSM would like to keep us...
and where you apparently enjoy living.
Its like High Definition for the Truth...
enjoy your time living in the gray :)

Ron
Exactly! Talk Radio gives you HD Truth. I love that. Clear choices! Simple decisiosn between black and white! Right vs. Wrong!

Unfortunately, it's divorced from reality. The world is a gray place, whether you like it or not.

NO VOTE
Conservatives didnt vote in 06 because of the way the REPS/CONSEVATIVES carried themselves in Congress with all this overspending and Conservatives will give the Nomination to Presidency to Hitlery becuase they will not show up to vote for a NON-CONSERVATIVE LIBERAL LOVER like MCSHAME

I would like to give Hillery an applause now for becoming the First Women President. CONGRATS HITLERY.




I'll Tell You What to Think
I once heard Rush Limbaugh say, and this is as exact a quotation as I can remember, "You folks go to cable TV and get all confused then I have to straighten you out. Don't go there. Come right here to me first and I will explain everything to you."

This doesn't sound to me as if the Limbaugh faithful are making up their own minds.

Florida primary truths
Romney McCain
self-identified:
Liberal 24% 49%
Moderate 21% 43%
Conservative 37% 29%

conservative vote is split more among all candidates than liberal and moderate vote.
I was surprised to see so many GOP voters self-identifying as "liberal"?

Thank You Liberals;
Republicans need to thank you for all your advice on picking our Presidential Candidate.

You guys really know how to pick Presidential Candidates.

You are presently deciding between a black guy and a woman.
Neither have any other qualification.
Neither have enough executive experience to run a local grocery store!

America surely needs to train an Affirmative Action President on the job during wartime?

You made a great choice last time too;
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/john-kerry-gained-fame-t hanks-to-phony-soldiers

In light of your record, should Conservatives trust your judgement in choosing a REPUBLICAN candidate?

Wrat Wrangler
"They all think alike and have pack mentality. 98% of journalists are registered as either Democrat or Independent. No more than 1% are Republican or Conservative."
***

Where do you get your statistics, bright guy?
I'll bet you also believe that Fox is fair and
balanced.

lilly writes
"This doesn't sound to me as if the Limbaugh faithful are making up their own minds."

I like Rush but I can think for myself thank you very much...The above statement are for those who really don't have a clue such as you.


The way I see it
If McShane and Obama and or hillary are the ones we have to choose from in November, then basically we will be voting for candidates with liberal track records. In other words if there are no other viable candidates then we will be picking the worst of two evils

McCain Vs.Hillary
The only difference is the size of Hillary's thighs. Sorry for the mind picture, but had to make my point.

Try cable news.
In the '92 election cycle a poll was take among journalists. They concentrated on the telejournalists but one can draw a safe conclusion that the big city fish wrappers like The NY Slimes, the Atlanta Urinal Constipation and Boston Bloat follow along.

When polled anonymously over80% of journalists identified themselves as Democrats and almost 14% as "independendt". They get indoctinated in J-School by ivory tower-dwelling ex-flower child dweebs so it's no wonder they all talk alike.

-Ray

Jack
You speak in just as uncertain of platitudes as you sugest I am. I am suprised you didn't throw in the term fairness, as if that has some specific meaning. You missed my point completely and would rather make generalizations about people than discuss the issues.
If you wanted to discuss what small vs large government means relative to proposed programs, taxes, spending, etc.. or who deserves government programs and who doesn't, how large they should be, how we could control the fraud, how we get more people to support themselves or become self-sufficient, then do it.
I am not saying there is no level and no need for any programs. I am simply saying discuss them instead of attemtpting to blast every individual that short cuts the concepts with broad theories (where the actual symantics would take hrs to discuss). I have a very simple and broad postion, if our government cannot manage to fix what it has started (and ruined such as social security, medicare, medicaid, veteran benefits, etc.) our politicians should not be promising more - period.

Jack - cont'd
Go look at the Robinhood Organization, it is a wonderful nonprofit organization that fights poverty in New York. It does so by finding, assisting and improving other nonprofit efforts that are effective in producing results for individuals they assist. They produce results by requiring results and targeting the source of the issue (in many cases education - teach a person how to fish vs giving them a fish). Our government has failed to provide such results and is instead a giant organization corrupted by ineptitude, back room dealing and special interests. That may seem too broad for you, but go look up some stats on fraud within our govenrment programs.
So I want to give my money to programs that actually work for our country and our citizens without all the watse and corruption and based upon those that actually show effectiveness - in my determination and opinion. If you want to categorize me as a bad or ignorant individual, beacuse I beleive I can find better means for the use of my money than allowing our career politicians that are tied to the hip of special interests and their own re-election funds, go ahead and make your broad ignorant statements. If you want to discuss how to improve our country, meet me in the non-profit world, that is where I live on a daily basis.

Sheepdog
In the last election, Democrats ran a piece of Communist crap against a RINO.
People held their nose and elected the RINO.

This time we may not even have a RINO to vote for if McCain gets the nod.
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/5/23/122006.sht ml

lemonade writes
They all think alike and have pack mentality. 98% of journalists are registered as either Democrat or Independent. No more than 1% are Republican or Conservative."
***

Where do you get your statistics, bright guy?
I'll bet you also believe that Fox is fair and
balanced.

Here's the proof
MSNBC.com identified 143 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 16 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties.

Lets see if you take away the 2 who gave to both parties, the breakdown would be %88.7 for democratic candidates..%11.3 for Republican canditdates...Well wrat wrangler was only off by %10 but that was a pretty good guess I'd say



we're being played ...
all of the candidates that have been anointed by the MSM have one signature part of the globalist agenda they've been bought off on ... whether that candidate is from the "right" or the "left."

for example; in the case of Bill Clinton and Mitt Romney their social issues stance is diametrically opposed but they both give the corporate free-trade globalists "skin in the game" as far as covering their bets in advancing their signature issues.

MyOpine re @2:35
Agreed...McShames liberal track record speaks for itself. Also in the old Soviet Union, when they had elections, the canditdates had to be members of the communist Party. It was just a popularity contest nothing more nothing less
Democrats are happy becuase they have candidates that mirror one another when it comes to govermnent policies so there basically in a win/win situation. Thats what i hate about the primaries...People can switchover and vote for the other party...I can see why they voted for McShame becuase he represents more closely what the Democratic party is about

Jack the Jerk
AGAIN you prove my point. Across the top of the home page of TownHall.com is a gallery of CONSERVATICE commentators/authors. When you click on Columnists, a list of CONSERVATIVE Columnists pops up. Almost EVERT Column on here takes a Conservative Position and therefore, a HUGE Majority of The Comments on said Columns and Blogs are Conservative.

Yet Geniuses like YOU insist on coming in and Denigrating Conservative Policies, Conservative Politicians and Conservative Commentators. You denigrate ‘The Rich’, yet you claim Ted Kennedy, George Soros, John Kerry and The Clintons (MILLIONAIRES ALL) as GREAT AMERICANS.

You denigrate America, yet it is The Freedom we enjoy in America that allows you to engage in Character Assassination, Demagoguery and Slander of those you disagree with while HIDING BEHIND YOUR KEYBOARD! If you had engaged in such ranting in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, more than your character would have been ASSASSINATED!

Why do you do this? Because The Dysfunctional Spawn of Leftover Hippies think they should be taken care of by he Government from Cradle to Grave! I DEFY YOU to go HuffingtonPost, Dailykos or DemocratUnderground and post ANYTHING that strays from Liberal Doctrine and see how fast YOU GET BANNED! Why do they Ban you? Like I said, they are Liberal Cowards hiding behind their Keyboards because they are TOO GUTLESS and TOO STUPID to debate.

Amen
Kuddos to Brent's article. The Left cannot "tolerate" Republican ideals. Tooo much "common sense" to endure.

the other big lie ...
is that the University of Chicago free trade globalists are the "right wing" and the Ron Paul/Pat Buchanan wing are the leftist kooks economically speaking ...

this is clearly seen when one hears from a Bolshevik neo-Con about those evil right wing fascists ... who so clearly practice the economic patriotism of Buchanan and Paul ...

the neo-Cons and fascists can both agree on one thing though: the "endless war" paradigm for advancing their political agendas ... the irony is palpable!

GOP RIP
Can anybody seriously tell me McCain is a two termer? Can anybody tell me where he differs from the Democrats apart from the surge? His best buddies are Democrats for goodness sake. I bet he must laugh himself to sleep evernight thinking of his claim to be a conservative. Heaven help the GOP. RIP.

Jack writes
People just grew up.
PS. For those of you who defend LImbaugh and his ilk by claiming he is just an entertainer, I have to ask why he, as an entertainer,doesn't get the same critcism from you that entertainers from Hollywood get, i.e that they should just shut up and entertain.

This is a no brainer...
Rush is exactly that an entertainer not an actor.
Some Actors believe they can act but but also think they can be politicians as well. I find it hard to belive they can actually mutli-task despite their limited intellect.

GOP RIP
Can anybody seriously tell me McCain is a two termer? Can anybody tell me where he differs from the Democrats apart from the surge? His best buddies are Democrats for goodness sake. I bet he must laugh himself to sleep evernight thinking of his claim to be a conservative. Heaven help the GOP. RIP.

Bill, I'd Be Glad To
But that isn't the point.

The point with which I began is that talk radio has been the primary force channeling the discussion in unproductive ways. Reducing complicated issues and situations to a simple Yes/No or right/wrong choice is what prevents folks from having the discussion of what works and what doesn't work.

The folks I lambaste aren't shortcutting the details to save time...they are propagandizing people. In teh process, they forestall the discussions you want to have. It is part and parcel of the right wing mentality that Democrats debate too much, they can't make up their minds, they see all sides of the question, they live in the gray areas. Yet all the discussions we need to have require debate, consideration of multiple positions, consideration of gray areas.

Let me provide one broad example,from which a lot of details flow. It is likely the case you and I agree that decisions should be based on actual data. And when the evidence indicates a conclusion, you should accept that conclusion.
I maintain that hard core talk radio conservatives in America are not willing to follow that maxim.

Here are areas where this plays out.

Evolution and "Intelligent Design"
Young Earth Creationism
The Value of Higher Education
Abstinence Only Sex Ed versus Abstinence PLus Sex Ed
Gay Rights
Women's Rights
The Financial Implications of the War in Iraq












SheepDog
Jack the Jerk, Hal Doofus, Loony Lilly, Wikipedia Wobbie.

THIS is Thr Cram of The Liberal Crop?!?!

And Bill, One More Thing
Read Georgetwinkle's response to me and tell me I am wrong...

Sheepdip
Ahhh, I see now. Its' OK for entertainers to be political pundits as long as you agree with them. If you don't they shoudljust shut up. DO I have it right?

**

Jerk
Who died and left you Queen? If we are such awful people, WHY do you want to associate with us? Light up your bong, download some Doper Music and go back to Liberal La-La-Land!


Jack
Just to clarify, you stated, "...decisions should be based on actual data. And when the evidence indicates a conclusion, you should accept that conclusion." and then you listed the following subjects:

Evolution and "Intelligent Design"
Young Earth Creationism
The Value of Higher Education
Abstinence Only Sex Ed versus Abstinence PLus Sex Ed
Gay Rights
Women's Rights
The Financial Implications of the War in Iraq

Are you saying all the evidence is in on these issues...and the answers have now been decided?

Jack
"It is likely the case you and I agree that decisions should be based on actual data. And when the evidence indicates a conclusion, you should accept that conclusion.
I maintain that hard core talk radio conservatives in America are not willing to follow that maxim."

Hogwash!! I'll give you an example...Why can't liberals except the fact that Republicans had more to with Civil Rights (a fact very convieniently ignored by most history books) than Democrats did?
The Civil Rights of 1957 failed becuase of lack of support from democrats (all southern Democrats)The Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed only passed becuase of overwhelming support from Republicans (over 80% in the house and Senate)
vs 69% of Democrats in the house and 61% in the Senate)
BTW--You forgot to mention global warming which is another liberal mantra I have heartburn with



Jack
I agree Georgetwin's response is wasteful. However, we are speaking past each other. Your intellectual elitism argument that somehow democrats think more than republicans, just further proves that you and n.a. have no real intellectual honesty.
Furthermore, your suggestion that those who disagree with you on your list of issues somehow don't look at the facts or study the realities, is more elitist nonsense. In other words, you are right and those that disagree either aren't smart enough or don't know enough - get overyourself.
Nancy Pelosi doesn't know how her own government works let alone the ramifications of her policies and she is the leader of the House democrats. She and others spout hate instead of discussing the issues, they call people Nazi's and paint with a broad brush. She is third in line to lead our country and the top Democrat and I doubt you would criticize her complete ignorance only because she agrees with you.
Our politicians on both sides are a bunch of liars and fakers driven by narcissism. And unfortunately given your replies, I am note sure you can see past your own nose to know what constitutes real discourse.

No, the evidence is never "in"
The evidence is never IN completely, but it certainly does point to certain conclusions. For example, the evidence is pretty conclusive that the earth is more than 7 thousand years old. The best evidence supports some form of the Theory of Evolution. The evidence is clear that people are better off if they get college degrees. The evidence strongly suggests that AO sex ed is not as effective as A+ ed.

here's a good one. The evidence clearly indicated Terri Schiavo was brain dead. But a lot of talk radio folks were all on board with ignoring that.


Jack and actor pundits
The problem...for me at least...
is with actors taking political stands based on false or knowingly misleading information.

They tend to use their fame and notoriety as the basis of their credibility and apparently have neither the time nor inclination to reasearch the facts. :)

RUSH RULES
I WOULD FOLLOW RUSH AROUND THE WORLD , I WOULDN'T FOLLOW MCAIN ACROSS THE STREET

Jack
Its' OK for entertainers to be political pundits as long as you agree with them. If you don't they shoudljust shut up. DO I have it right?

Nope didn't say that...Nor did I ever say that actors couldn't be political pundits...Nor did I ever say "Just shut up and Act" I dont' give two Sh!ts what they do but there only making fools of themselves


RUSH RULES
ID FOLLOW RUSH AROUND THE WORLD, I WOULD NOT FOLLOW MCAIN ACROSS THE STREET

Bill, Maybe we are getting somewhere.
"Your intellectual elitism argument that somehow democrats think more than republicans, just further proves that you and n.a. have no real intellectual honesty."


I am not saying that....quite. I am saying that the right wing talk radio apparatus has been a significant impediment to rational discussion. That medium grew and thrived by taking complex issues and reducing them to simplistic, right versus wrong issues, often without regard to evidence or consistency.

This suggests that one reason Republicans lost ground in 2006 and are currently in disarray is that independents and centrists are beginning to realize the limits of talk radio type politics. Thus the current Republican front runner finds himself powerfully at odds with the ultimate talk radio opinion maker.

I can give you plenty of examples of liberals and liberal issues where attention to evidence is sadly lacking. Gun control would be one. The effectiveness of certain government programs would be another. But liberals do not depend on an organism like talk radio. They don't have one.




jack
"here's a good one. The evidence clearly indicated Terri Schiavo was brain dead. But a lot of talk radio folks were all on board with ignoring that.

So what!!! Does that mean that everyone who heard that on talk radio agreed with that? NO!! Do you think conservatives believe with what Rush, Hannity or Beck have to say? Me personally I don't ..Your above statement is sterotyping at its best and hypocritical at its worst


Ron
Thank you for your excellent post at 3:57...

SheepDog
"The evidence is never in."

In other words, there is no such thing as right and wrong. A CORNERSTONE of LIBERAL NONSENSE!

Sheepdog
What you cite is a really good example. Yes, people with (D) after their names were impediments to Civil Rights progress at one time.

But you tell only half the story, don't you. At that time, the south was the "solid south" firmly democrat in every election. When Northern Democrats allied themselves with Republicans and began to effect change, those Democrats who were impediments LEFT the Democrat party, first forming a separate party called the "Dixiecrats." Later those attitudes became more aligned with Republcans, which is why Republicans now carry almost all teh southern states in any given national election.

SO yeah, the neanderthals used to call themselves Democrats. Now they call themselves Republican.

Jack
Come'on
The Liberal press have provided the same snapshot approach to serious issues - in favro of dems for decades. If you have ever been closely involved with anything the mainstream press has ever covered, you know (i) that they get about 50% correct, (ii) they manipulate the facts or (iii) just plain ignore the facts when they don't support their argument.

Perfect example was the latest NYT piece on the murder rates for returning servicemen & women.

Just like your hated radio hosts have been supporting republican ideas in a way too simplified manner, the public media has been doing it for democrats for decades.

Again, you're limiting the picture and are lacking honesty in your points - doing exactly what you are accusing others of doing. Give it a rest.

Ron
I fail to see the difference between waht you said and what I said. In other words, if you agree with an entertainer, it's fine for him to speakout. But if you don't he should just shut up.

By the way, if someone is ignorant and makes stupid comments,then they should be chastized, Their profession has NOTHING to do with it.

Sheepdog
Check this with Jack's list and see if you find similar items.
http://web.archive.org/web/20020215003619/www.dsausa.org/pc /pc.progag.html

An Observation
sheepdog writes: "here's a good one. The evidence clearly indicated Terri Schiavo was brain dead. But a lot of talk radio folks were all on board with ignoring that.

================================================

Its only fair. MSM has done the same with Jimmy Carter for decades.

How did that happen?
Jack writes: What you cite is a really good example. Yes, people with (D) after their names were impediments to Civil Rights progress at one time.

But you tell only half the story, don't you. At that time, the south was the "solid south" firmly democrat in every election. When Northern Democrats allied themselves with Republicans and began to effect change, those Democrats who were impediments LEFT the Democrat party, first forming a separate party called the "Dixiecrats." Later those attitudes became more aligned with Republcans, which is why Republicans now carry almost all teh southern states in any given national election.

=================================================

Sheets Byrd is a Republican?

MyOpine-SheepDog
HMMM…assigning stereotypes to people HE HAS NEVER MET! HMMM, isn’t that PROFILING!? That’s not very LIBERL of Jerk, IS IT?!

Jack
I have "ALOT" (i.e. Heartburn)of philosophical differences with liberal ideology just like you have philosophical differences with conservatism. It would be pointless to argue each others points of view becuase neither one us are can prove each others point. So in the end I say "we can agree to disagree" and leave it at that.

Hockey Goon
Actually it was on one of Jacks Posts but I forgive you.

Its the facts Jack...
Backing up an argument or opinion that makes all the difference...not the agreement.
I have no use for anyone’s opinion... that has not the foundation for it. :)

Bill
I am not terribly sympathetic to the old "evil liberal press" argument.

For one thing, in a lengthy and arduous process, the right wing managed to convince a lot of folks that objectivity was passe. No one was objective and therefore, there was no point in seeking an objective opinion.

This allowed the right wing propaganda machine to equate the reliability of a Rush Limbaugh with that of a the New York Times, a Mike Savage with the Atlantic.

The difference is that an NYT or an NBC should be and is striving for objectivity and accuracy, and can be called on it. A Rush Limbaugh doesn't even need to pretend. To the talk radio mind, this difference is meaningless, and that is exactly what talk radio wants them to think.

In the run up to the Iraq war, for example, those who reported getting their news from Fox were more likely to be factually mistaken about issues than people who got their news from any other source. Those who got their news prinmarily from NPR were most likely to have accurate information. But, in the conservative mind, NPR is evil and Fox is the savior.

Under the influence of the talk radio uber mind (which exists, don't kid yourself) the capacity to demand objectivity and accuracy has been diminished

Georgetwin
I'd say he copied it off that list word for word..LMAO

Georgetwin
How much you wanna bet that Hillary and Obama use that for there playbook? Isn't that what both of them are preaching now? God Help us

Hockey Goon
Not Byrd, but Strom Thurmond. Are you really challenging the reality of the Dixiecrat movement and the realignment to the Republicans of segregationst Democrats?

SheepDog
YOU KNOW IT IS! Liberals are so spineless, they have to be propped up by the Government.

SheepdogMeet Bill. Bill, Sheepdog

This is the point I am trying to make. The idea that it's just an irreconcilable difference of opinion and that no one can possibly be convinced by evidence and information is exactly what talk radio has been selling you for years.
That way you won't have to actually consider any other viewpoint.